>> rose: welcome to our program. tonight we talk aboutut syria ad remaining options with tom friedman of the "new york times," joshua landis of the yooufrlt of oklahoma, fouad ajami of the hver institution at anedor a a an marie slaughter at princeton. >> we should have never been there, charlie. we should never gone to the united nations security council. it was delusion and when you hear the secretary of ste clinton saying oh, this was a travesty and when you see our u.n. ambassador susan rice saying this is disgusting, this is amazing and we convinced ourselves, we fooled ourselves we could do libya one more time. libya isn't syria; syria isn't libya. it was a mistake to head to the united nations security council.

>> ros we connue this ening with russia's ambassador tohe unitedations, v churkin. >> if i understand our sort of mode of thinking correctly, you cannot expect or you can actual count on it if you're our ally that we're not going to turn around overnight and say, wl, you know, we've had good relations with you over the years but now thanks, no thanks, deal with your problems, we're not going to do anything about it. but it's not... again, it's very important to understand it's not our effort to support anybody specifically staying in power. >> rose: we conclude with a look back at the superowl wh espn's adam schefter. >> i think it was not a great game. i think there were so many mistakes made along the way. dropped balls,oaching errors, mistakes that it prevented it from being a game for the ages. but it had a dramatic ending with a real interesting, intriguing way that it ended with the failed hail mary and

the gnts and eli manning taking that team 867 yards or 80 yards, whatever they did in the final few minutes forhe victory. >> rose: thevents in syria, amssador from ruia rponds and a look back at the super bowl and the primacy of quarter backs when we continue.

captioning sponsored by rose communications from our studios in new york city, this is charlie rose. >> rose: we begin tonight with the ongoing crisis in syria. negotiations at the u.n. security council broke down this weekend after russia and china vetoed the arab league initiative calling for president bashar al-assad to step aside. the veto folled what me descbe as e rian government's deadliest assault on opposition forces since the uprising began 11 months ago. faced with an increasingly unpredictable conflict, the u.s.

state department suspended operation iss of its embassy in damascus this morning. in a intervi with matt lauer on sunday, president obama said the u.s. seeks a diplomatic resolution to the crisis. >> i think it's very important for us to try to resve this without recourse to outside military intervention and i think that's possible. my sense is that you're seeing more and more people inside of syria recogning tt th nee to turn a chapter and the assad regime is feeling the noose tightening around them. this is not going to be a matter of if, it's going to be a matter of when. >> rose: joining me from washington is tom friedman of the "new york times". from norman, oklaha, joshua landis from the university of oklahoma. with me in new york, anne-marie slaughter of princeton university and fouad ajami from stanford university. i'm pleased to have each of them here so i begin with anne-marie slaughter. where are wefter thunit nations failed to come to an

agreement, a recommendation? >> we're in a b place. today was terrible. yesterday was terrible. the shelling in homs is really ticked up a notch. they're using mortars. they're essentially just blowing up people in them. the activists there basically say thatussia and china gave the regime a green light to do whatever it takes to shut the opposition down. >>ose: tom, you just saw... you were just in russia. wh arehe russians saying out is? we've got the ambassador to the united nations, vitaly churkin, coming on later. >> well, you know, the story they tell is that president medvedev basically cooperated with the u.n. resolution no-fly zone on libya which they... the russians say was meant simply to protect civilians and it turned into a regime change operation. that's their excuse basically for refusing to go along with the syrian initiate because,

you know, they see syr in two very... i should say three very important ways. one is a huge arms customer. something like $5 billion in outstanding arms contracts and for putin who now faces elections, some of these one-industry arms manufacturing cities are going to be very important. that's number one. number two, they see syria as their last port of... their only port in the mediterranean and really one of their last allies in the arab world. and lastly, for putin, there's a very bad example here,he syrian regime looks a lot like his n, you know? authoritarian regime, out of touch with its people and he doesn't like the precedent. so that's the argument they make. it's qui cynical but that's the argument. >> rose: we'll be back to it. you had a column in the "wall street journal," i think you called this the last battle of the cold war. >> right. we should have never been there,

charlie. we should have never gone to the united nations security council. it was collusion and when you hear the secretary of state clinton saying this was a travesty and when you see our u.n. ambassador susan rice saying this is disgusting, this is amazing. we convince ourselves, we fooled ourselves that we could do libya one more time. libya n't syria;syria isn't libya. it was a mistake to head to the united nations security council. we even convinced ourselves that the arab league is a mighty organization. this was never in the cards. i spent afternoon-- and we can talk a little bit about this-- reading bill clinton's memoirs and it's interesting. when you look at the way he did kosovo without the unid nations, this was the way too this. thin the journey to the u.n.-- a this is my pnt about that journey to the u.n.-- was really, in fact, a very cynical attempt on the part of the obama administration to give itself running room. to give itself time before it had to make some real decisions.

>> rose: my impression is you're looking at him as a former professor you're not happy with and don't agree. >> ion't agree. i don't agree. first place, i didn't think this is another libya. in libya you had a plan from the arab league to have a no-fly zone that was clear goi to includnato no's talking about that here. actually, the arab league was asking for a plan that involved a political transition. if the u.n. had been able to support that-- and, really, even as of friday i think people thought that the russians could be convinced to come along-- then the arabeague had much more authority to do what it's going to do. i think that was important to try because i really do think had you gotten there you would be in a better place. without it, actuay i think what you see now is russia and china have put their cards on the table. ey're going to stand with the government no matter wt that government does. that exposes them in the middle east, that tells the arab league it's really up to the arab league to stop this, to move. and i'm not sure they'll go back

to the u.n. but i think it was actually a valuable thing to start with. >>ose: okay. joshua landis? >> well, i... younow, i think that the united states is not about to intervene. even if we had got an go-ahead at the u.n. and russia sided with some kind of intervention or at least some kind of stiff language that uld allow inteentionthe s. does not want to get involved. this is not libya this is like iraq. this is lebanon. this is an ethnic struggle overlaid on top of this democracy struggle. if the united states gets involved in syria, it'soing to be a messy affair and i think that this is going to play out over a matter of a long time, it going to be bloody, but we've seen this bore. in lebanon it took 15 years to destroy christian power and iraq america destroyed sunni power very quickly, the minority that was ruling there. but the suns cameack. they didn't like i, it was a long struggle. here you have aloe whites

dominating the political scene. the last minority of these minor tarn states left throughout the middle east by the colonial powers and they're going to hang on. and it will be a bloody battle. this is not libya. and if the united states steps in, they step in at their peril. i don't think the united states wants to do it. they would do it if tuey or saudi arabia led. but neither turkey nor saudi arabia wants to lead which is probably indicative of where the united states should be, too. rose: i wt topenhis up. two questions, number one, does the united states have a plan that can somehowtop the violence in syria and if the violence i syria is not stoped where does it go from here? >> i can't say i'm totally up to date on where the latest diplomacy is. it does seem to me we should

consering materiel support for the posion forcether we're fang a real mascre. this thing is is so lopsided and i am deeply impact by the fact that i actually covered the mother of all massacres the, the post-hama massacre back in february of 1982. i saw what papa assad did to that city. he leveled it completely. literally brought in steam rollers. i think his son would do the same. i think we have to find a way to prevent that fm happening and tilt the bance of powhe other way. the thing i don't know simply because i ve not met with the syrian opposition and i don't really know who th are, what exactly they stand for, i'd love to hear fouad on that, i think he's more close and probably has read some of what they have to say. just... i myself don't feel i know exactly who these people

are and how connected they are to the forces inside syria. >> rose: fouad, who are these people? >> we have josh landis evything i kw i read about on his blog. (laughte >> re: b i hear a very distinct difference between his opinion and your opinion. >> absolutely. but we already eablished sya is not libya. that's already... we've already gained. i think there's a very interesting difference between... tom is right. when we go back and revisit 1982 and friday was... they've been giving names to these friday. they named friday "forgive us hama." so they are talking about hama in 1982 and now it's homsin 2012, 30ears apart. i think there is a big difference. i think one t one noticeable difference... in ha hama the regime battled the muslim brotherhood and most of the society stood aside. they didn't like the muslim brotherhood, they were queasy about the regime.

hafez assad wasn't so bad. people saw him as the best of a bad lot. this is very different. this is a population that has risen against a despot. it's an ethnic issue, as josh has said, it's an alawi government battling... it's a sunni opposition to an allawi government. but what we now see the siety as reject bad sharr al-assad. he's add war with his country in a way that his father wasn't. >> rose: have they rejected him in favor of anything other than getting rid of him? >> the future. >> rose: and who will shape the future? go ahead. tom. >> fouad, a question. do you think there is this muslim brotherhood element underneath the rock that we haven't seen in the way the sol fi dimension surprisedsto so dege in egypt and iraq? is it just a different society?

>> i don't know,'d like hear josh on this. in 1980 membership in the muslim brotherhood became a capital offense. you were executed there is a muslim brotherhood, it's in germany. the exiles are there. they're old. it's the people of hopls,t's the people who've ted ohe asadz. it's the people who look and realize that be that is the son of hafez and guess what? bashar has a son called hafez so they are in the know that these people have dynastic ambitions to rule that country forever and to turn it into a system of plunder and cruty and nepotism and all that we have seen. i think this is a complete rebellioagainst a despot. >> rose: so you don't worry about something like the muslim brotherhood coming to power? >> no way. anyone who worries... this is what paralyzedamerican diplomacy about syria. we kept worrying about the

alrnative. but look at the regime that's been in place n for 40ears. look at the great crimes committed by the assads father and son and look at the way they did it. as they did these terrible crimes and teible deeds to their own population they kind sold the rest of the world on the id that they really a kind of... they're the firemen of a troubled region and the firemen in lebanon. /think we were deluded by all this. >> rose: clearly there are differences with lib and even haspoken t that. t how will this en, joshua? give me a sense of... >> well, i think fouad is right. i think opposition is going to win. i think this regime is doomed. it's the last minoritarian regime. it can't sustain itself. but it's ruled syria for 40 years because it's hung together based on tribal values, on family sticking together and used these sort of patry moan y'all values in the face of

nation and syria has a very weak politica.. nationalolical counity. and if america waltzs in there and bombs the syrian military and the palace and does what it did in libya or iraq you're going to open up a society that's very fragmented and in some ways what we're seeing with the opposition beginning to coalesce around a leadership, but they still haven'tound that leadership. there are a lot of fragments. the syrian nional council, the main body that america's bonn talking to, has only been able to establish a leader for three months because they don trust each other. they're muslim brotherhoods, selar peoplekurds ara. syria has to develop a leadership which is going to take time. a leadership that's respected on the ground and i think we're going to see such a leadership evolve out of this military... what is now a military uprising and america may well and other governments are already i think funding and arming and training this opposition and that's going to be the way it is because the

awite regime is not going to give up diplomatically. they've made that clear. this is going to be won on the battlefield and if the west was to influce it they have to a and fund the opposition. but that's going to take a lon time. it won't happen any time soon. >> rose: it's unlikely to happen but suppose assad said "i don't want to go where qaddafi went." >> that's unlikely. he's got a lot of support. >> rose: okay. so he's going to goo the end, you're suggesting. he will battle to the end because he thinks he can possibly win. >> and also it's because the minority... the future looks bleak for the allow wetes in a sunni-led syri this was the problemwith the christians in lebanon and sunnis in iraq, this is why they're still fighting today. these nation states are not nation states. they are in fragments still. and the sunni opposition has been kept down by a small nority and the christians have

supported them, jews, others have supported them. there are a lot of sunnis who have been very complicit in this. but that's because they don't see the alternative and this is what we've mean is in iraq. you don't really is an alternative today. if you break it open, you're going to unleash a lot social violen. you could. you don'tknow. i shouldn't say this so lf-assurededly. but we don't know what's going to happen, as we didn't know in iraq. and the dangers of waltzing in and thinking this guy is bad, we're going to bomb and then expecting something good to come out the other end, we're not sure what's going to come out. and in a sense by letting it evolve with its own dynamic and perhaps funding it, you're more likely, i think to get a cohesive opposition that can provide security for syrians when this is over. >> rose: but i don't hear anybody advatin.. and certainly present emedto dismiss this in his interview on super bowl sunday with matt lauer suggesting that the united states was somehow... would

somehow be engaged in intervtion. >> libya? >> rose: no, syria. the president made clear that... he did not fesee that. but how can the reformers win without some help from outside the borders of syria? >> they're going to get help. they're going to get help. >> well, but... so there are three options. one is we don't do anything and we watch what is going to be worse and worse and worse in terms of thetality. really, as t said the leveling of hama well, they're already starting toevel homs andso we have the option of doing nothing. we have the option, as tom said, of arming the free syrian army which is now a military rebellion. that is what the rebels are calling for. that's what i think most people think is... >> rose: how would that take place? >> well, it means... they're already getting some arms across the boarder from turkey, from qatar, through jordan. and we... nato would probably help that process. that ensures a long and bloody civiwar. it means that you're at least

helping the folks who are now the opposition but the syrian government still has a substantial advantage. but it's better than doing nothing. the third option is still a military intervention, but it's not going to be the united states bombing anyone. i don't think actually you'd have u.s. planes... >> rose: what would it be? >> what itould be is led by turkey and qatar and saudi arabia going up through jordan and down through turkey, creating humanitarian zones that would allow anybody whoantsto defect from the syrian army to be safe and protecting civilians. now, everyone says there's no political will for that. i accepthat. but a year ago no one would have believed that the arab lgue was going to come to the u.n. with a plan tosk bashar al-assad to step down. mass murder has a way of making the unthinkable thinkable and i still think that's a possibility. >> rose: do you think it's thinkable, tom? >> well, i think one of the things to really keep inind as

anne-marie waspeaking is that wee been through this experice wh iraq a the reason ira today, you know, still has, i think some hope, whether it's 5%, 10%, or 50% of having a reasonably decent outcome was because there was an american midwife to basically midwife the transition between this minority-led regime to a constitutionally-bed multiethnic society. albeit hugely imperfect. but the fact is, it's because there was a midwife there that was rusted iermeary between thearties that iraq has a chance today. and, again, i don't know how big but has a chance for some kind of decent outcome. think of now syria going through the same process that josh landis talked about without any midwife and that's going to be very comicated. >> rose: what would be the

midwife for you? >> well, here we are in the obamaian world, this false choice, eithe boots on the ground or head in the sand. one of the two. >> ros i thought the plan was someho.. >> that's exactly what anne-marie was talking about. there's a lot that could be done. there's qatari money, there's saudi money, there's turkey. the turks keep, in a way, betraying the syrian opposition. they're always about to do something against the regime. erdogan has toyed with the syrian opposition has he has toyed with the obama administration because we defer to him all along. we thought this is the man who know it is scene. he understands the game. we have to break up, if you will. we have to put it to the turkish govement >> re:sohat should we ask, all of us, of the russian ambassador to the united nations when he mov to this table as soon as you guys leave. tom? >> well, i think 2 t greatest thing that could happen right now-- and i wouldn't rule it out entirely-- the russians, i think they've taken quite a black eye

over this and i did get the feeling in moscow there were people who weren't entirely comfortable with where they are and we're saying... we really are kind of buying a round-trip ticket on the "titanic" after it's hit the iceberg. what's the fure of supporting the assad regime? and so th grtest thi tha would happen is if we could somehow do a deal with the russians, bically say to them what would it take for you guys to withdraw your support for this guy and ease the assads out. i think that would save enormous bloodshed and create the best opportunity for some kind of negotiated solution between the allawis and the sunnis that would preserve something for the allowis and make them interested in a deal. i wouldn't give em up on that. >> rose: i would askthem st that question. what would it take. thank you, tom freedman friedman joshua landis, ann-marie

slaughter, joshua listen lann dis. joining she vitaly churkin, the russian ambassador the united nations, i'm pleased to haveim at this table on short notice. you may have heard the discussion i had here, at least part of it. and the question is is there room here to bring russia aboard on the effort to do something about the killing in syria? >> in terms of diplotic and political effort i think this that russia is more aboard than anybody else because too many countries and people who are making a lot of noise and big loud statements, in fact, they do very little in order to accomplish a political settlement there. they've been very active throughout the crisis with various players. damascus, the a sigs, the arab league. we've been trying to involve washington and other western capitals but from the outset they decided it wa a regime chan oortuty they

announced assad has lost his legitimacy. we've been saying there have been some succses in terms of using force which nded to b avoided. that political reform should be expedited. that the syrian government has not done enough in temples of... and vigorously enough in terms of political reform. so impressing the syrian government quite hard on some of those things. at the same time talking to the opposition of the arab league and others. >> rose: the understand thing i want to understand is are you suggesting that you would like to see a result in which the assad family, the present present,asha al-assad, stays in power, or sharing power? >> no. no. we've repeatedly said that that we do not care about that. >> rose: but it's okay with you. not that you don't care. it's okay if he stays in power. >> we don' want to pre-judge anything. individuals, personalities are not impoant to us. the things which important to us to stop bloodshed in syria and to avoid major regional and international destabilization there, which is most likel going to happen if the current

trend continues if thelt go go through the cle of ming the oppotionndill insist that toppling a certain personality is the only way to... >> rose: he's more than a personality. >> well, a certain structure. >> rose: a family who rules a country. >> exactly. if the only... the smartest thing they can think of is to go on frontal attack on them incidentally saying all the while that they themselves are not going to intervene but sort of pushing others, the opposition groups, to intervene, this is going to be a very bloody outcome. just one comparisons n ter of statistics if u will. it maye a cynic way to put it but 5,000 people dead they y in syria, maybe it's true. a regime change operation in iraq costs 115,000 dead in civilians alone to say nothing of eight years of dislocations, millions of rev geez, internally displaced persons, et cetera, et cetera. so if you're talking about a

frontal attack in terms of regime change you should be prepared for those numbers to go up. >> rose: you don't believe the united states would consider that as an option for the united states, do you? >>hat o seis the united statesn tes of its policy is moving things in that direction unfortunately. >> rose: not in terms of american troops but i think the president has said it's not likely to happen... >> i'm not ggesting that the united states is going to intervene. most likely they will not. but that's another reason to be careful about your line of action. you should not throwing people into the fire when you know you won't be there to help them out. >> rose: i think they've made the clear, don't you what t options are and even in libya they were there because of behazi but twere moving out and not going to be in the lead. >> rose: th i don uerstand how to interpret their actions. for itance... >> this is not about the united states, though. this is reall about syria and it's about ruia supplying arms to the huge military contracts with syria. yes? yes? >> i'm not privy to details but

probably yes, probably yes. which is going to be like small change compared with u.s. miliry supplies into the region and hundred and billions of dollars. yes, we do. yes, we do have certain contracts, we do have certain relationships and for us being russian i would say probly that it' less difficult than for some others simply overnight to change ones view about a 30-year-old ally and see him cruelly put in the cage. >> rose: ah! so here's what i hear you saying. that russia unlike the united states and what it did in egypt with mubarak will not do that in syria and yr long relationship with the assad family. >> it's not our style. and not the family. we have a relationship with the government. we hava relationship with the country. >> rose: government has bee unr thrule ofhe faly for more than 30 years. >> we don't want them to be thrown into bloody turmoil. and this is what is going to happen. >> rose: hers what i hear you

saying, tell me if i'm wrong. you said something interesting which is that russia views the syrian possibility of civil war as something having to do with how it' viewed in the world. >> i'm not sure i... >> rose: you just sai unlike the united states you will not abandon somebody who's been a friend. >> no. >> rose: and therefore you're concerned about your perception in the world with spect to ria en tug they ma be tottering towards civil war. >> i'm making a statement of fact. if i understand our mode of thinking correctly you cannot expect or you can actually count on fit you're ally that we are not going to turn around overnight and say, well, we've had good relations with you over the years but now thanks, no thanks, deal with your problems or i'm not going to do anything about it. but it's very important to understand. it's not our effort to suort anyby specifically stayingn por but if those structures in

syria have existed for decades are going to be demolished then the bloodshed is going to be predictable with many thousands dead and great regional impact on iraq, lebanon and beyond and we want to avoid this kind of situation. it's too close to our borders and too important internationally. >> rose: there's also this. the chinese also had the same positions that the russians did. you're in the middle of this. is the reason for taking the stand they did which was similar to what you took for different reasonstor same reasons? >> well, you should ask them but let me say something. i've been thinking about it the past 48 hours as you can imagine and i think what happened on the security council is something of a diplomatic tragedy. it could have been avoided with a little bit more patience. we did bring some amendments. we think that they were important issues to address mainly dealing with the effort

to control the armed opposition to give them the signal that ey mustlso tone dow their activity cease their actity. those amendments were declared unacceptable and instead of showing some diplomatic patience we went for a vote which should have never taken place. so if things had been handled differently, i think we could have tomorrow or the day after tomorrow a positive vote on e security council. and this is too bad because we were very close. >>ose: wait, you said you could have had a positive vote in the security council if not for what? >> if not for hasty vote on saturday. and if ere given an oppounity diuss our endmentsnd to accommodate them. you know, in the course of those negotiations twice we were on the verge on thursday of breaking up in the security council with our partners that every time we found a way to come together with some language which we thought could be satisfactory. so a final effort should have been made and we could have had

could have wednesday this resotion on syria. >> rose: this may have been for different reasons but i'm now going to read you some of the things other people said because of the way the vote came down. hillary clinton "wha happened yesterday at th united nations was a straj city." boop boop boop "a great disappointment." a moral stain of the united nations. i think they're saying it for different reason but i'm interested... yes? >> i think those loud statements is really a waste of diplomatic munition and they should think hard if they were trying to turn the syrian situation in some kind of russia-baiting exercise becausety think many ways they nd russia more than we need them on so of the tough issues before us. >> rose: clearly there's issues of iran and... >> a lot of them. so it will be very bad mistake that they go down that road. >> rose: do you feel that a bit? >> well, i hope it's not going

to happen. those emotional statements i think they should have been made. we have taken note of them and they will feel that we have taken no of them. >> rose: they being france and... >> well, those countries, members of the security cncil who ve been making tho statements bu my personal but very strong opinion, if you will, is exactly at i said. that somehow it turns into this russia-baiting exercise. it's going to hurt internationally. and i think it's going to hurt them more than us. >> rose: it seems to me you're saying if this continues you're less likely to get any support for us in terms of helping you with iran. >> iran, afghanistan, maybe some other issues. >> rose: wow. there's also this, as tom friedman phrased with the group four. and asou just sd, you hope you... you thought that was the rush to vote and that there was a... >> yes. >> rose: so what has to happen to get russia 20-to-come around and make a positive contribution

now? >> charlie, we have been makin positive... >> rose: i know that. >> our foreign ministers together with head of our external intelligence i slope going to play an important role in our efforts to move the crisis to a political solution and we're not refusing to corporate with others. we hope the united states a others are going to... just one example of destructive... if i may say attitude. several days ago before the veto we made this proposal that the government from damass and opposition groups come to moscow for informal exchanges without fixed agenda but priorities in preparation for a dialogue under the aegis of the league of arab states and there were some rather positive initial reaction from some oppositi gros. then ty we tol to respond

negatively. so if this is going to be the influence of our western colleagues, what kind of contribution do they expect to... ruia to make if they will try to block our diplomatic efforts in the syrian crisis? >> rose: who are you referring to who stopped them? >> well, we definitely had the feeling that our western colleagues had a hand in it, those who have influence on them. >> rose: europe and the united states? >> yes. >> rose: can i make one final int? >> rose: can make one final point? >> rose:f coue. >> i was listening to one participant om washington made a... >> rose: tom friedman... >> really bizarre point. >> rose: what was bizarre. >> that our... one of the reasons of our quote/unquote support for the assad regime was similar to the putin regime. >> rose: he did say that. >> this is amazing in terms of the depths of the situation in russia.

>> rose: he's jusreturned from moscow, too. >> but this makes it more amazing cause putin is now fighting a politic battlef hilife in preparing for presidential ections in a tuation when hundreds of thousands of people across moow demonstrate in support of various candidates. so to even compare in the remotest of ways the political structure and the situation in russia to what has been there in syria is just... i think, frankly, lacks an intellectual honesty and this is too bad. >> rose: i hear you. but let me make this point also and mr. friedman is perfectly capable of reiterating his int. the is this point, that your prime minister who's now running for president has made it very clear that russia will not... that he thinks that the arab spring is gone way beyond where it ought to be and that he considers anybody who will suggest that the arab spring is coming to moscow something that will not happen.

>> well, of course it will not happen. >> rose: it's an idea! >> of course it will not happen. >> rose:itis an idea! listen, charlie, i'm sorry but anybody o cod even... i ow thatome sators have been making this point. russia is not about to have a revolution and one thing they're missing russia in the current election process is making an enormo stride in the development of its democracy in the way in terms of people are demonstrating, expressing their views, in terms of the way the elections are going to be conducted with web cameras in each pollingtitaon at the cost of $500 million. russia is making with all its imperfections an enormous strides tord democracy >> rose: but the resul o those elections and the interpretation of those results have an impact on prime minister putin and how he will conduct the next election. >> i think it's having... the next election is going to be in march and it's going to be an election of completely different

order in terms of transparency, in terms of people understanding that this is not something which should not be manipulated. then the elections we had in december for this and not to see that transformation of russia the its meaningn terms of a democratic pross in russia, ma tho ridulou comparisons is just aggravating d shows that there is very little serious litical analis and, you know, like... i remember, you remember as well 1996 presidential elections which pretty much everybody believes that major fraud happening and yesin basically stealing the election. not a single complaint. not a single complaint from washington or any other capital so wh is impornt for you? is it the fairness, the democratic process or who is going to win? u pick d choose. so if mebody.. you think suits your interest, you don't care about democracy. once it's somebody with which you may feel uncomfortable for

whatever reason then it's all about democracy. you have toget rid of that. so you should install more web cameras in your polling stations you know? this computer vote, we have some suspicions about that. how it can come out in terms of fairness and accuracy of the results. >> rose: this is a conversation in which you have and continue at another time. i'm really interested. i think you speak wh passion. >> exact tomorrow? (laughs) >> rose: about your love for your country. you speak that and to suggest th nations always act in consistency is a point well taken and often you can prove that in almost every country in the world. but thank you for coming. pleasure to see you. >> my pleasure. >> rose: vitaly churkin is the ambassador to the united nations. we continue this evening many just a moment. >> rose: super bowl xlvi ended dramatically last night with the new york giants beating the n englanpatriots. thscore was 21-17.

eli manning is the game's most valuable player. he chestrated yet another spectacular game-winning fourth quarter drive. an improbable catch by wide receiver mario manningham was the defining moment. that catch put the giants in prime position to close out the game. a touchdown was not enough time for tom brady lead his famous comeback drive. the win ves w york the second title in four years. fresh off the plane from indianapolis is adam schefter. hes espn' n.f.l iide everand i'm pleased to have him here that the table for the first time and for a second appearance on our show. welcome. >> thank you for having me here, charlie. an honor to step off the plane and come into your studios for the first time. >> rose: define this one for me. >> i think it was not a great game. i think there were so many mistakes made along the way. dropped balls, coaching errors, mistakes, that it prevented it from being a game from the ages but it had a dramatic ending

with a real interesting, intriguing w that it ended with the failed hai my and the giants and eli manning taking that team 86 yards, 80 yards, whatever they did in the final few minutes for the victory to me early on 2 giants had a chance to p away the patriots and they didn't and then the patriots had a chance to put away the giants and they didn't andthese two teams tha went back and fourth in ser bowl 42 did the same thing the super bowl 46 and the difference plain and sime was a play that the giants were able to make. you ntioned mario manningham, great through om eli manning >> rose: but agrea cat. >> a better throw. better throw. >> rose: right in his hands. >> great throw. >> rose:ow big is he? >> mario manningham, i interviewed him after the game. about six feet. taller than me. t saying much. >> rose: (laughs) yes, i would say. eli's taller than you, too. he's about 6'4, isn't he? >> charlie, most people are

taller than me. >> rose: other than jockeys. >> (laughs) >> rose: so that catch was the defining moment of the game do you think? >> earlier right before that dre tom brady threw a pass to wes welker. was a second in 11 and it was on his back shoulder away from the safety a good pass, not at great pass. wes welker got both hands on it. wes welker isne of the most sure handed wide receivers in the n.f.l.. he has been a star and stalwart for the new england patriots. if he makes that catch the giants don't get back the ball. they don't get back the ball and ha r putting into position where manningham can make the catch he does. that was the whole difference in this game tome for all this me and energy thateverody put into it, wes welker did not come up with a huge play, mario manningham did and because of that, today we're saluting eli manning and tom coughlin and the

giants general manager and talking about how great they are because we welker didn't hold on to that one pas i'm not pinning the loss on him. if he makes that one play, goes different. same thing-- and we talked about this in our first play together-- if asante samuel one play before david tyre catches e ball on his helmet one handed in a vcro tch. one play before that asante samuel has a pass thrown to him from eli planng. it goes into his hands hands and out of his hands. giants maintain position giants keep the ball, giants throw the pass to tyre, giants throw the touchdown pass to plaxico burres giants win the game, giants are great, patriots are not. same thing yesterday. wes welker catches that pass. it's a first down, they deep ball, the clock is moving, they'll score again and put away the giants instead the most sure-handed receiver on the patriots, onef t most sure-handed receivers in the game drops the pass, opens the door eli throws the pass, that's

what sports is about. taking advantage of these opportunits. >> rose: that's what we love sports. y did he not make the catch. >> hey, listen, he's a human being. he dropped it for whatever reason. it was not a simple catch. he had to get to one side, he had to turn around his body. he said that's a catch that you should make and tom bdy put that ball in the spot where he did. i don't know if you heard ts but tom brady's girlfriend, gisele bundchen came outfter the game and was caught on a cell phone camera highly critical of the patriots wide receivers who didn't hold on to the football. and he said my husband can throw the football, he can't catch it, too, he can't do everything. but her language was a bit more pro fine than mine. >> rose: oh! there is also this, then, reputations. what ds thi do f e

retation of e coach of of the giants, tom cough lynn? that >> that's the amazing thing. because those plays are not made and because the other ones are tom coughlin has two super bowl victories and tom coughlin now will be thought of as a hall of fame coach good enough to be inducted one day into the pro-football hall of fame. now, the irony of this, of course, is that midway through the season when the giants were in a four-game losing streak the fans in new york wanted tom coughlin's head on a platter. >> rose: were there guys that you know and women and men who write about sports calling for his resignationnd where are they now? >> oh, it was all over! that's the way the n.f.l. works, though. you win; you're great. you don't; someone's going to have to pay. and when they were on th losing streak thereere repeated questions evywhere in the media from ticketholders about whether tom coughlin would be

able to keep his job. that question came up at vious ints on espn and elsewhere and i laughed at it every time because you're the talking about one of the great men in football, a successful coach, he once coached the jacksonville jaguars and the forme owner of the jaguars, wayne weaver, admitted one of the great mistakes of his tenure as owner of the jaguars was firing tom coughlin. and tom coughlin... this is what i don't understand sometimes. tom coughli was a good enough dorchester beat the undefeated patriots at the time in super bowl 42 but yet just a few years later he's not good enough to keep coaching and he should be fired? doest make any sense. >> rose: soeli manning he now his o wor before the super bowl said i should be among the elite he clearly has proved he should. >> charlie, he is elite. not only is he elite but you can make the argument over the second half of the season there was not a quarter back in football who was better. >> rose: tom brady in any way diminished by this?

>> well, i think here's what happens. i think tom brady is absolutely considered one of the greatest quarter backs who ever played. but had they won that game, we would be sitting here saying is tom brady the greatest quarter back of all time and the answer to that very well might be yes. and that is what super bowl victories do for a player or coach's legacy. >> rose: so but for a dropped pass into the middle of his hands tom brady would be considered today perhaps the greatest quarter back ever to play the game. better than johnny you nigh doctor-assisted suicide, better than otto graham, better than... take your pick. >> i believe that would behe ca and i can assure you that at t very least we would b discussing if he is the greatest quarter back of all time. now your question is not is he the greatest quarter back of all time, now the question is does this diminish his legacy. >> rose: there is also this, bradshaw. when he had that run in which he

went into the end zone, fell into the end zone i hear he was told one thing by the coach, another by the quarter back what's the story as to why he went into the end zone when people thought his instructions were not tthe go in and run out the clock. >> it was the most hesitant, reluctant game-winning supe bowl in history because he couldn't decide whether or not to go in and when i spoke to him on the field momes after the game, what h told me was i thought he said that eli manning told them to go down and that his momentum carried him into the end zone but i think more than anything wha that was, charlie, thawas a mouse taking the cheese he sees the tra is set and can't rest it. 's not i yr.n.aas a foball player to stop short of the goal line. and you can't not score.

so he did score and he opened up the door to the patriots getting back the ball, to them having another chance to beat the giants and to new england nearly pulling off that last-second miracle with a hail mary that would have been an incredible improbableeding on a play that we would have talked about... >> rose: that could have talked about, too. if the ball had bounced into... rob gronkowski, the tight end that h the bt chance to catch the ball o the carom, coming off the high ankle sprain he was not healthy yesterday during the game. if he's healthy can he get there? i don't know. but it would have been interesting to think. and think about this, we would have had a super bowl catch to supplant the one david tyre made against the new england patriots in super bowl 4 but it didn't happen. that's been the difference tween these two teams in the last three games they've played. wh the game mattered st and was on the line the giants have found the way to make aplay thathe n englandpatriots haveeen unable to ke.

so the gnt a the super bowl champion because they had a great defensive line, a. b, the they had a better overall team than the patriots. >> or, d, none of the above that it's a quarterback league and that eli manning is the best quarter back in the game. we've never scene a team with a 9-7 record win a super bowl in the post-season and this year with the lockout in training camp where so muchime was miss and so many players didn't have the advantage of training during th off season it even it had playing field. you look at super bowl winners every year, by and large unless you have a team like the baltimore ravens, the quarter back like trent and one of the greatest defenses in all time with the tampa bay buccaneers with one of the greatest defenses of all time in broad january son playing quarter back. unless you have an all-time unit for n.f.l. history if you don't

have an elite quarter back you're not going to win. and eli manning this year when matred most was better than tom brady. that more than anything is why the giants won. did it help they had the pass rush you're referring to? yes. did it help they were stronger at certain positions and had more depth? yes. but it's all about the quarter backs. we can sit here and debate all the xs and os you want. it is always going to come back to that one position. >> rose: where's the quarter back from stanford going to go. >> andrew lauch the going to go to the indianapolis colts and he's going to displace peyton manning who basically has been waiting to bre up with the indianapolis colts for some time. both sides wld have been better off moving in separate directions and an draw lauch will be the successor toeyton manning in indianapolis, a franchise very rarely has had the kind of good fortune indianapolis has had where peyton manning decided to go back to tennessee in his senior year and come out to indianapolis in 1998.

he man it is fort until 2011 and then when he has neck questions as he does now with three neck surgeries in 19 months they get the chance to move on to the stanford quarter back andrew lauch whom n.f.l. scouts believe is the btollege quarter back the top n.f.l. quarter back prospect that n.f.l. scouts have seen since peyton manning in 1998 and in a quarter back lead to tie it all together charlie if you get peyton manning and andrew lauch in a league where arter backs win your franchi shou be winning for decades. >> rose: so andrew lauch is better than tom brady? better than eli manning were at comparable times? >> certainly tom brady was the sixth round pick, the 199th overalselection out of chigan where he couldn't eve n the starting job on a full-time basis. eli manning was the numbeone pick in his draft and the guy ma believed in him more the anybody was the former giants general motors who basically staked his reputation on eanning

becoming the type of quarter back that he has. ernie nailed that and was dead on. but andrew lauch is considered the top prospect that has come out of college football in over a decade. now i'll also say this, charlie, just because n.f.l. scouts say that you're going to be the top prospect doesn mea anything i had very intelligent football people tell me last spring that cam newton, the heisman trophy winning quarter back from auburn wouldn't make it at the n.f.l. level. >> rose: he had a good year. >> rose: >> all he did as a quarterback was throw for 4,000 yards and look dominant at the position he looks like he could redefine with the way he plays the game. >> rose: he could redefine what it means to be a quarter back. >> the way he runs and throws he is incredible. and i think back on the comments people made. they missed, just like ey missed on victor cruz who went undrafted. so the same scouts w re saying that this quarter back is the best one also didn't see victor cruz, the giants' wide receiver good enough to draft.

so this is a very inexact science. there are some brilliant football minds but they don't always get it right. just like people who pick games don't get it right. i thought the patriots would win the game. >> rose: you did? >> i picked them. >> rose: how much? >> well, i thought... they would have intangibles in the game. >> rose: where is peyton manng going? >> that's the great question. when you look at his situation. any team has to take a look at peyton manning. >> re: wouldn't you love to see him play for the jets? >> i think the jets would have to look at it. i don't think it's going to happen. the jets may wind up-- ponder this possibility-- having to face peyton manning twice a year because the miami dolphins are going to be in prime position and they are certainly one of if not the favorite to land peyton manning. let's just say hypothetically he does sign with miami and is healthy enough to play next year, the new york jets are now in a division where they get to play tom brady twice a year, peyton manning twice a year, while eli manning is also playing qrter backin tir

same tow >> rose: and how about andrew lauch. >> he'll be in indianapolis starting for them playing in the a.f.c. south division. just because he's projected to be as good as he is there's still usually cam newton being the exception usually a learning curve for rookie quarterbacks and they don't grow into greater back... >> rose: rogers being a good example. >> eli manning a great example. he was drafted in 2004. didn't go to a super bowl until 2007 didn't grow into an elite quarter back until 2007/2011. >> rose:venhoug weo a lot of politics and culture we know a little bit about sports here. >>ou know more about sports than i know about th prince of saudi arabia i'll tell you that. >> rose: (laughs) pleasure to haveou any time. >> m pleasure, thk you for having me tonight.